The urge to pass on knowledge to others is probably embedded in our DNA to help the survival of the species. I'm no exception, and since I like to research topics that are either controversial or less familiar to people, I always find myself with plenty of knowledge I want to share. My preferred means of teaching is to write novels that incorporate the information I have gained through my research.
.jpg)
The
challenge is to teach readers about unfamiliar places, societies, events and technologies without making them feel they are in school! Key to this is to avoid disrupting the narrative with information and descriptions, aka "data dumps."
The problem, of course, is that no one who is completely familiar with a culture or
period is able to see what makes it unusual. Here's a real-life example. A
very well-educated African, who traveled over-seas for the first time
as an adult was amazed to discover that toilets did not need to smell.
He had assumed that since shit smells, toilets had to smell, and it was a
revelation to discover that if properly cleaned and flushed they need
not do so. In short, no one who has grown up in the advanced industrial
world is likely to comment on toilets that don't stink, while no one from Africa would comment on those that do.
The
historical record is consistently distorted by this phenomenon. For example, because all boys who went to school in ancient
Greece learned to read and write, none of the foreigners who described
the Spartan school mentioned that the boys learned to read and write.
That was obvious and didn't need to be said. Instead, they commented at
length on the things that were unique about the Spartan
educational system, e.g. the boys could be flogged, or elected their own
leaders etc. Modern readers, not seeing reference to Spartan boys
learning to read, often mistake this for proof the boys didn't learn when in fact it is only proof that the observer didn't think it was worthy of mention.
What
this means when writing a novel is that the inhabitants of the world
depicted usually know about their society and surroundings and therefore
would not comment on them. The author, therefore, must find a way to
tell the readers about things that the characters already know and
understand.
One way to deal with the problem is to create a context for learning that makes
discovery of new
facts a force that moves the story forward. A key device for doing this
is to introduce Point-of-View characters who are outsiders or novices
because they are themselves learning. For example, because most readers know very little about Ancient Sparta, I chose to open my novel The Olympic Charioteer through the point-of-view of an Athenian, a stranger coming to Sparta for the first time in his life who is shocked and confused by one thing after another. In this way, I was able to describe the unique and unfamiliar environment of my novel not as "data-dump" but in a series of episodes that moved the plot forward.
Having a foreigner as a major character, however, is not always possible, but there are other devices for making explanations (education) occur more normally and in context. For example, in
my novel "Moral Fibre" the device for explaining things was to take the
reader through operational training along with the central character.
I.E. the reader learns along with the protagonist at each stage of the process. In my novella "Lack of Moral Fibre" the device was a series of
discussions between the protagonist a psychiatrist trying to piece together the causes of a
temporary break down.
Sometimes, however, rather than building the entire novel around the learning process, I find it useful simply to introduce secondary or tertiary characters who from time to time provide a fresh perspective. This
enables me to describe aspects of the setting that the principle
characters would not naturally comment upon. For example, in the latter Middle Ages, knights and nobles knew heraldry inside out, but if they described it as
they would have done ("or, a cross pate gules", for example), it would be
meaningless to us. A peasant observer, on the other hand, could describe a knight's shield in terms we
understand -- a yellow backdrop with a flared, red cross on it. By temporarily describing, say, a joust between two protagonists from the point of view of an apprentice sneaking off for some excitement, it is possible to provide more information without interrupting the narrative or making the characters behave anachronistically.
The
utility of changing perspectives from time to time in order to teach
better (and incidentally add depth of perspective) is one of the reasons
I abhor the modern fashion for writing everything in the first person. There is truly nothing wrong with
the prose of John Steinbeck or Leo Tolstoy. The obsession with not
changing points of view is a modern fad that will hopefully die a
natural death -- soon. Writers
should be free to share their knowledge in whatever way is most
effective and entertaining because it is only if the teaching is
effective that readers will truly learn.
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment